Mailing-List: contact pluto-dev-help@portals.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: pluto-dev@portals.apache.org
Reply-To: pluto-dev@portals.apache.org
Message-ID: <23559160.1176543735546.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2007 02:42:15 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Ate Douma (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: pluto-dev@portals.apache.org
Subject: [jira] Commented: (PLUTO-308) This patch is for new deployment with
 JAXB instead of castor and the changes for the new API Revision from 8 to
 11.
In-Reply-To: <32459684.1170938706277.JavaMail.jira@brutus>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PLUTO-308?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_12488858 ] 

Ate Douma commented on PLUTO-308:
---------------------------------

Sorry for the possible confusion typo: I meant "Your patch though still includes the old ones", not just once :)

> This patch is for new deployment with JAXB instead of castor and the changes for the new API Revision from 8 to 11.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: PLUTO-308
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PLUTO-308
>             Project: Pluto
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: general
>    Affects Versions: 1.1-286-COMPATIBILITY
>            Reporter: Torsten Dettborn
>             Fix For: 1.1-286-COMPATIBILITY
>
>         Attachments: jaxb_n_api-r11.080207.patch, jaxb_n_api-r11.210207.patch, jaxb_n_api-r12.120307.patch, patches_before_included_060407.patch, patches_before_included_060407_No_Licence_change.patch
>
>
> Christian has made a patch for the new JAXB binding for the deployment from the portlets, because there are too many problems with the patch (Issue 287) we decided to reject this issue and patch it all in one. Here is the description from Christian:
> "Unfortunately this patch is a big one. In the new spec there are
> qnames, which are used to identify names, e.g. event names. The
> previous implementation of the Portlet Object Model use castor
> for xml binding. Unfortunately castor does not support qnames in
> a way we need it. Thats why i implement the xml data binding with
> jaxb. In the new Spec there are other points JAXB will be used,
> therefor i think using JAXB is not a bad idea.
> My first idea was to change the *DD classes to interfaces and then
> let castor and jaxb implement this classes. In this case we should
> be able to use both xml data bindings together and the user has the
> choice.
> But i ran into several problems with this approach. On the one hand,
> the castor *DD classes doesn't provide all necessary methods
> and therefor much work with the castor implementation has to be
> done. On the other hand i want to use the classes automatically
> generated by jaxb.
> In my mind the best thing would be, to use the castor classes and
> annotate them with jaxb annotations. Then there aren't as much
> changes as with this patch.
> I have gone the other way, a matter of time. I've delete the castor
> things and use jaxb as the only xml data binding.
> What this patch does:
> I have generated (xjc maven plugin) the jaxb classes and add it to the
> repository. Then all occurences of *DD are replaced by the jaxb *Type
> classes. Some methods had to be renamed, and some jaxb classes had to
> be implemented because of XMLSchema conflicts.
> I use the JAXB RI, that is why i had to change the poms and installation
> dependencies. I add a new JaxbDescriptorService interface and the
> corresponding implementation.
> Note:
> With the current portlet-app_2_0.xsd (provided at:
> http://ipc658.inf-swt.uni-jena.de/spec/JSR%202.0%20API/portlet-app_2_0.xsd)
> it is not possible to use old portlet.xml files from JSR168. This has
> to be changed in the final release of the specification. Therefor i had
> to change the portlet.xml files in the repo.
> What has to be done:
> Writing of portlet.xml and web.xml is not supported yet.
> I would appreciate if someone could implement the (IMHO) better approach
> of adding the jaxb annotations to the castor classes."

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.